Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a How-To adjacent to Docs handbook on how to pull in tech reviews/contributions to missing feature gate docs #2580

Open
drewhagen opened this issue Jul 31, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release.

Comments

@drewhagen
Copy link
Member

drewhagen commented Jul 31, 2024

I've been a part of the SIG Release Team subproject for a few cycles. I've been in discussions on opportunities to clarify how to do things and process enhancements that could be better documented. Some of these come up as requested favors outside of the scope of subteam handbooks, favors that don't have clear guidance but could use some help to get done so I figure it might be useful for shadows and others to have some instruction sets of the things that come up. Not sure if feature request was the right template to use for this, so I'm open to feedback. 😄

What would you like to be added:

A how-to document (instruction set) for how release docs can help pull in technical reviewers and/or contributions for missed feature gates.

Why is this needed:

As @sftim pointed here out in our #release-docs slack channel (x-post), we've missed documentation on some 1.30 feature gates (also likely to have missed some for 1.31, though we're still discovering).

While we figure out how to catch these better in the future, an instruction set document would be useful to get more people clear on how we can trace feature gates in the kubernetes code, find contributors of feature gates, and pull them in with their SIG to ask that they either technically review docs produced by SIG Docs or retroactively contribute to the docs on their feature gate.

This instruction set could elaborate the simple steps I took on a comment like these:
kubernetes/website#47253 (comment)
kubernetes/website#47255 (comment)
With a clear instruction set, this work for 1.31 and beyond can more easily be divided as tasks amongst team members rather than tackled by one person.

How this would be added:

I'll add a PR soon that adds this instruction set under release-team/role-handbooks/docs/how-tos/

@drewhagen drewhagen added kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release. labels Jul 31, 2024
@drewhagen drewhagen self-assigned this Jul 31, 2024
@drewhagen drewhagen added priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. and removed needs-priority labels Jul 31, 2024
@sftim
Copy link
Contributor

sftim commented Jul 31, 2024

To be clear about the effort: @tengqm did all the detective work and I only shared it onward.

@drewhagen drewhagen added kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. and removed kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. labels Aug 10, 2024
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 8, 2024
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Dec 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. sig/release Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Release.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants